Fuji GFX 50S vs Hasselblad X1D-50c

Without a doubt, the release of medium format cameras by both Fujifilm and Hasselblad have shaken up the photography industry and have sparked interest from many enthusiast and professional photographers, who are interested in moving up to medium format. While Hasselblad delivered the smallest and the lightest medium format camera ever made in the shape of the X1D-50c, Fuji definitely surprised many of us with the low (for medium format) price of the GFX 50S. With both cameras featuring similar Sony-made sensors with the same size and resolution, one might think that the two cameras compete directly with each other. However, once we look at some details and understand the real differences between the GFX 50S and X1D-50c, it becomes more apparent that the two cameras might have been created for completely different purposes and uses. I have been fortunate to have had my hands on these two cameras for the past few weeks and although I am planning to put the two cameras to real use very soon, I have already gathered some thoughts that I would like to share with our readers. Let’s take a look at the two medium format cameras in more detail and compare them side by side.

Build Quality

Both cameras feel extremely well-built, with magnesium alloy chassis and high-quality plastic materials covering the different parts of the camera body. However, there are definitely differences in perceived quality when you hold both cameras in hand, with the Hasselblad feeling a bit nicer in comparison, thanks to its superior rubber grip, nicely polished and refined aluminum finish and beautiful engravings – it feels like a work of art. It definitely has a style attached to it and its nicely cut, and sometimes edgy corners leave a rich, luxurious feel. The viewfinder is so masterfully integrated into the camera body, that it made me wonder how Hasselblad was able to fit it in such tight space. The X1D-50c is a very minimalistic camera – only a few buttons here and there, along with two dials. That’s it – very classy and chic. It seems like Hasselblad put quite a bit of effort into the design of the camera and it really shows.

In comparison, the Fuji GFX 50S feels quite a bit different. It has the same high-quality finish as the Fuji X-T2, which is very good, but certainly does not have nearly the same feel as the Hasselblad. Fuji chose function over design, which certainly does not make the GFX 50S as sexy-looking as the X1D-50c. There are two large dials for ISO and shutter speed, similar to what we see on other X-series cameras. Two dials on the rear and the front, along with a bunch of functional buttons on the top and the rear of the camera. The electronic viewfinder is not integrated and must be inserted on the top of the camera.

The Hasselblad X1D-50c definitely wins in terms of build quality and the overall feel of the camera.

Ergonomics, Weight and Handling Differences

The two cameras differ quite a bit when it comes to handling, ergonomics and weight. I personally find the X1D-50c much more comfortable to hand-hold compared to the Fuji GFX 50S, not only because it has a very comfortable rubber grip, with nothing on the way of your fingers, but also because it is physically smaller and lighter in comparison. The PASM dial is also very nicely done – push it in and it stays inside the camera without getting in the way. The rubber front and rear dials have a superb feel to them, with distinct clicks, feeling even better than the rubber dials on Nikon DSLRs. In contrast, the GFX 50S dials are made out of plastic, are smaller, feel kind of cheap and they rotate without much resistance. It seems like Fuji simply reused the same dials on the GFX 50S as on cameras like the X-T2, which is a bit odd, as the GFX 50S is a much larger camera in comparison. The grip on the Fuji GFX 50S is nice, but the protruded area to the right side where the “Q” button is feels a bit too rough and sharp for my hands. The GFX 50S is noticeably larger and heavier – those 200 grams of extra weight with the EVF attached are pretty significant. So if we purely judge handling based on the overall feel in hands, total weight and size, the Hasselblad definitely comes out on top.

As you can see, the cameras look quite different in size, specifically depth.

However, things are vastly different in terms of overall ergonomics and that’s where the Fuji GFX 50S wins, by a huge margin. While Hasselblad focused on a very minimalistic design of the X1D-50c with as few buttons and dials as possible, some things are downright confusing and can take time to get used to. Since there are no navigation buttons on the back of the X1D-50c, you are forced to use the combination of the front and the rear dials, along with the five buttons to the right of the LCD. Those buttons do not have any labels on them – instead, all you see is icons like playback, rectangle, star, an “x” and three striped lines. And depending on where you are in the menu, the buttons have different functions. To jump to a particular menu icon, you either have to use the touchscreen, or use the front and the rear dials – the front dial moves the selection horizontally, while the rear dial moves it vertically. Speaking of the menu, I personally found it to be overly simplified, with some menus having no more than two options. This could be good for someone who is starting out in photography, but come on – this is a medium format camera! People who will be buying such a camera are not going to be novices in photography and they will be expecting to be able to have more options to customize the behavior of the camera.

Functional Ergonomics vs Minimalistic Design

Another big ergonomic problem for me personally, is the lack of being able to quickly change a focus point. When will manufacturers ever get that the ability to quickly change the focus point is critical for all photographers? The Hasselblad X1D-50c does not have a joystick or navigational buttons to move the focus point. In fact, even after updating the camera to the latest firmware, I could not figure out how to change the focus point on my own – I had to resort to an online manual. It turns out that one has to hold and press the “AF / MF” button on top of the camera in order to bring up the focus points. And guess how you select a focus point? Yup, using the front and the rear dials! Once again, the front dial moves the focus point horizontally, while the rear dial moves it vertically. Why not take advantage of the touchscreen and allow one to just click with their finger to move the focus point to the desired area without having to press anything first? By default, the only thing you can do in live view mode is tap on an area of the screen twice to zoom into it instantly (if you hold and press the “AF / MF” button, only then you can use your finger on the touchscreen to select a focus point). None of the buttons are programmable, so you are stuck with the AF / MF and ISO / WB buttons on the top, and AE-L + AF-D buttons on the back.

Hasselblad X1D-50c Menu

The menu system is somewhat buggy and laggy. Even with the latest firmware updates, I found some serious bugs that should be addressed as soon as possible. For example, when shooting in aperture priority mode, if you happen to dial in the exposure compensation via the LCD touchscreen, it will be the default compensation going forward, even if you override it using the rear dial of the camera (Exposure Quick Adjust must be selected to be able to do this). So if I dial something like +1 on the touchscreen, then before taking a picture decide to change the compensation to -1 using the rear dial, as soon as I take a picture, my override resets itself back to the +1 setting. This is a very bad design and something Hasselblad should address – why are there two exposure compensation functions (Exposure Compensation + Exposure Quick Adjust) and why are they not in sync? If I dial compensation, it should be exactly the same, whether I do it via the touchscreen or the rear dial. In fact, I would prefer to have a separate button for exposure compensation – every camera I have used in the past has it, even the most basic DSLR! Camera meters are never perfect and considering how much photographers rely on it, there should be an easy way to change it. And speaking of meters, there is no meter button to be found on the camera. The only way you can switch from one metering mode to another, is by engaging the touchscreen. So if I am shooting in the cold, I either have to have the right touchscreen-compatible gloves for the screen, or I have to take them off. And lastly Hasselblad, what in the world is “Image Orientation” doing in the “Exposure” icon in the menu?

There are many more annoyances and problems, such as the 15 second live view timeout that switches back to the menu if you go idle, but I am going to save all those for the upcoming review.

Fuji GFX 50S Menu

What about the Fuji GFX 50S, you might ask? Like I said, the GFX 50S wins here by a huge margin! As expected, there are plenty of buttons and dials to quickly change camera settings, very similar to the overall experience one gets from using X-series cameras. A dedicated exposure compensation button, a dedicated joystick for quickly changing focus points (thank you Fuji!), a total of 8 programmable function buttons, an excellent LCD screen on the top of the camera that shows the most important camera settings, the same “Q” button we see on other X-series cameras that allows for quick changes in camera behavior, the same amazing menu system as on the X-T2, tilting touchscreen that actually allows moving focus points by touching different areas of the frame – I could go on and on. Like I said, it is a vastly superior camera ergonomically.

Blackouts and Lags

One of my biggest frustrations when using the Hasselblad X1D-50c has been its blackouts and lags. First of all, the camera takes forever to turn on! After you hold the power button, it takes about 5 seconds for the large “H” logo to clear before the menu comes up (sometimes it takes another 2-3 seconds for the menu to come up). Then if you want to start shooting, you have to half-press the shutter release and there is additional lag that will take another second or two before the LCD or the EVF will engage in live view mode. Think this is bad? Wait until you take a picture! That’s when the biggest issue comes up – the camera goes in complete blackout for 2-3 seconds when shooting RAW + JPEG. During this blackout, you cannot see anything and you cannot do anything, so your only option is to wait. Want more lags? Press the playback button after capture – another 2-3 second wait before the image finally shows up. It almost feels like Hasselblad used a very old and slow processor that cannot keep up with the camera.

The Fuji GFX 50S is free from such issues. Turn the camera on and the LCD comes up almost instantly, with EVF being delayed by less than 2 seconds. The menu system does not have any lags and when you play back images, they come up right away. The touchscreen works very well and pinch and zoom is instant. So far, I have not experienced any major lags and blackouts on the GFX 50S.

Autofocus Speed and Accuracy

Both cameras lack on-sensor phase-detection autofocus, which means that focusing is pretty slow when compared to many other modern digital cameras, since AF is acquired only through contrast detection. Focus speed is not bad, but if you are used to the insanely fast AF of a DSLR, or the latest generation mirrorless cameras, you will be disappointed. The X1D-50c has a total of 35 usable focus points, whereas the Fuji GFX 50S can go all the way to 425 focus points, so Fuji definitely comes out on top there.

When it comes to focus accuracy, I found both cameras to be similar – most images turn out to be very sharp in the areas where the focus point was aimed at, which is great news. However, the Fuji GFX 50S again leads in terms of technical abilities due to vastly better camera firmware. For example, there is no face detection option on the X1D-50c, whereas the GFX 50S inherits these capabilities from cameras like the X-T2 and it works reasonably well. This is a critical function for portrait photographers and I am not sure why Hasselblad did not include it – after-all, Hasselblad medium format cameras are used by many portrait photographers, especially in studio environments.

Overall, as of now, I find the GFX 50S to be superior in terms of AF capabilities.

Leaf Shutter vs Focal Plane Shutter

The biggest differences between the two cameras are leaf shutter vs focal plane shutter. On the X1D-50c, the shutter is located inside the lens, so the front of the sensor is free from a mechanical shutter. When taking pictures with the two cameras, the difference in the noise produced by the cameras is very different – you hear a click-click, click on the Hasselblad, whereas the sound of the shutter on the GFX 50S is somewhat similar to what you would hear from a standard DSLR or a mirrorless camera.

So which one is better, leaf shutter or focal plane shutter? That all depends on what you are going to use the camera for. The biggest advantage of the leaf shutter, is that it can sync with flash at insanely fast speeds, so you do not have to worry about workarounds like high-speed sync. The difference is huge – we are talking about 1/2000th of a second sync speed vs 1/125th of a second. However, that’s also a limitation of the leaf shutter – when shooting in bright conditions, you cannot go beyond 1/2000th of a second, whereas with the focal plane shutter, you can go up to 1/4000th of a second and if you tun on the electronic shutter on the GFX 50S, you can go all the way to 1/16000th of a second.

The biggest surprise for me, however, was the fact that the X1D-50c was not “What You See Is What You Get” (WYSIWYG). Let me show you what I mean. Take a look at the below image:

Hasselblad X1D @ 90mm, ISO 100, 1/125, f/3.2

When I was looking through the viewfinder when messing with the 90mm lens, I saw perfectly round bokeh shapes that looked large and beautiful. And the above image is what came out of the camera after I took the picture. I was a bit surprised to see this, so I took another shot to see if it was a temporary bug, but it happened again – the image looked stopped down! Since I have not had much experience with leaf shutter lenses, I was not sure what was going on, but as I thought about it a little, I realized that such behavior is probably normal, since the lens would be stepping through all apertures at the end of the exposure, potentially causing a very different look. Still, that’s a pretty big problem for me personally, as I would not want to have my images with that “stopped-down look”. Interestingly, this also affects depth of field. When shooting with the GFX 50S and the X1D-50c in a studio setting, the background on the X1D-50c at the same aperture looked more stopped down, with more things appearing in focus.

How does this translate to images? Let’s take a look at a sample portrait using the Hasselblad X1D-50c and the 90mm f/3.2 lens:

Hasselblad X1D @ 90mm, ISO 800, 1/180, f/3.2

As you can see, the out of focus highlights definitely do not show roundness to them at the widest aperture of f/3.2. Even shooting with the Fuji XT-2 and the XF 56mm f/1.2 lens, I was able to get bokeh shapes looking nice and round:

X-T2 + XF56mmF1.2 R @ 56mm, ISO 200, 1/125, f/1.2

Considering that leaf shutter lenses cannot have very large apertures (and as of now, all three Hasselblad lenses are limited to f/3.2-f/3.5 maximum aperture), I struggle to find the real appeal of the leaf shutter lenses aside from the flash sync speed. If you are after beautiful bokeh, the focal plane shutter is the way to go. Also, you see exactly what you are going to get…

When it comes to lenses, both systems have superb lenses at the moment and I expect more lenses in the next few years from both Hasselblad and Fuji. Just a quick FYI – both systems use focus-by-wire method of focusing. Build quality of lenses seem to be very solid, but the focusing on the Hasselblad lenses is pretty darn loud when compared to Fuji lenses.

Image Quality

I was hopeful when Fuji said that they customized the Sony sensor – I assumed that it would perform better than the Hasselblad. I tested both cameras at low and high ISOs, then even performed basic ISO invariance tests, underexposing all the way to 5 stops and then recovering in post to see if there were any drastic differences between the two. Unfortunately, I cannot seem to find any differences in sensor performance – both sensors seem to be very similar. There are no differences at low ISO values, so I am only going to show you ISO 6400 and ISO 100 pushed to 5 stops. Let’s first take a look at ISO 6400 (Left: Fuji GFX 50S, Right: Hasselblad X1D-50c, click to enlarge):

Do you see any differences here? Good, because I don’t see any either.

Let’s take a look at ISO 100, underexposed by 5 stops and then recovered in post (Left: Fuji GFX 50S, Right: Hasselblad X1D-50c, click to enlarge):

In essence, you are looking at ISO 3200 here. Again, I don’t see any drastic differences between the two images, which shows that the sensors on the GFX 50S and X1D-50c are practically the same. The sensors are pretty darn close to be ISO-invariant, which is great news!

Conclusion

Based on everything above, I can conclude that for my photography needs, the Fuji GFX 50S is clearly a better choice – it is a very functional camera with excellent ergonomics, superb menu system that gives me plenty of customization options, reliable autofocus, easy to use interface and excellent image quality. The Hasselblad seems to be aimed towards those who need to be able to sync their flashes at fast shutter speeds. It is a much sleeker and lighter camera, with very well-thought out design. But aside from that, I struggle to see how the Hasselblad X1D-50c can take on the Fuji – its minimalistic ergonomic approach, long & annoying blackouts, and overly simplified menu system leaves me wondering if Hasselblad is going to take steps to address these problems via firmware updates (and I am not even sure if those issues can be addressed via firmware). Fuji already has quite a bit of mirrorless experience under its belt, with cameras used by the masses, and it really shows. In my opinion, for most photographers looking at a budget-friendly medium format camera, the GFX 50S is the better choice. However, if I were a portrait photographer and fast flash sync speed was important for my style of shooting (without resorting to HSS tricks), I would definitely take a closer look at the Hasselblad X1D-50c.

Update: Received a couple of tips from my friend Ming Thein. Turns out RAW + JPEG slows things down considerably, so switching just to RAW makes a huge difference. The blackout is still there, but it is much shorter. Also, the blackout gets shorter after the first shutter actuation. For better AF experience, he recommends to switch to manual focus and use the rear AF-D button for focusing instead (back-button focusing), which definitely makes a difference. Thank you Ming!

Hope you found this comparison useful. If you have any questions, please let me know in the comments section below.

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

If you enjoyed reading this article, please consider subscribing to our email newsletter to receive biweekly emails notifying you of the latest articles posted on the website. Email Address First Name

By checking this box I consent to the use of my information, as detailed in the Privacy Policy.

Related articles:

About Nasim Mansurov

Nasim Mansurov is the author and founder of Photography Life, based out of Denver, Colorado. He is recognized as one of the leading educators in the photography industry, conducting workshops, producing educational videos and frequently writing content for Photography Life. You can follow him on Instagram, 500px and Facebook. Read more about Nasim here.

Reader Interactions

Comments

1) Wieslaw

March 16, 2017 at 4:00 am

Thank you for sharing your review. It seems that there is a difference between the two cameras; Hasselblad colours appear a little ‘warmer’. That leads to the important question for the product photography application. Which camera has closer to life colour rendition?

Wieslaw, “color rendition” is a myth. You create any color you want from the camera when shooting RAW. If your question is about JPEG, then both cameras have different-looking JPEG output, as expected.

Largely but not entirely. It is my understanding that CFAs on medium format sensors used to be more selective (i.e. denser colour filters) at the expense of sensitivity. More selective filters allow better separation of RGB channels which in turn enable more accurate/easier colour profiling under a wider range of illuminent.

Not sure this is still the case with the recent CMOS medium format sensors, though, as they seem to be much more “all-purpose” sensors, with good results at very high ISO as well.

put a grey card in the show and properly color balance. The color is more likely lens coating related then sensor related. and a ZERO issue. Just like in the film days. BUY SOME CC filters if you can’t be bothered with a Macbeth chart

I briefly handled the X1D at a photo show last Sunday and I can echo your experience.

I like rangefinders (and rf-styled) cameras, and still use my Mamiya 6 occasionally, so I really was prepared to love this Hasselblad, even if I probably would never have bought it. The look and feel were indeed awesome, but the first shock came when powering up the camera. Very slow startup indeed. Next disappointment was the focus. AF was very slow and hesitant on the show booth (and light levels were not that low), and MF was difficult because focus peaking looked very crude (thick highlights as opposed to thin lines).

Admittedly, I only had a very brief experience and hopefully much of this could be improved in fw updates. It would really be sad for this nice camera to be constrained to mostly static subjects…

Fiatlux, focus is indeed pretty slow due to contrast detection. If you want faster AF, it is either the Pentax 645Z, or full-frame cameras. I don’t think we will see phase detection AF on mirrorless MF within the next 2-3 years, since integrating phase detection pixels on such a large sensor is not an easy task.

With the GH5, Panasonic is showing that CDAF only can be made very fast: www.dpreview.com/revie…-dc-gh5/10 It actually seems their technology can compete with the best mirrorless offerings in terms of AF speed. Ultimately, I wonder if over time CDAF will be the way to go (with the inevitable faster and faster CPUs and faster memory access).

CDAF can be made fast if you have (a) a very fast sensor readout, (b) image processing power proportional to the sensor resolution count, (c) have lenses optimised for CDAF, ideally profiled to allow DFD. The 33 x 44 mm cameras already stumble at point (a) but also probably at (b).

I am also not sure about what is happening with the bokeh. Normally, in all but the cheapest leaf shutter lenses (think compact cameras), aperture and shutter blades are distinct.

Only with the fastest shutter speeds could there be issues at full aperture, with the shutter blades not fully opening before closing, and therefore slightly impacting effective lens speed (and bokeh), but this should not happen at 1/125s. Odd.

Nice to see a detailed comparison of the X1d to the GFX. Thank you and I’m looking forward to round 2 after you spend some more time shooting with each of the cameras. Very interesting findings and can’t wait to see more.

Paul, glad you’ve enjoyed the article. I’m planning to leave either tomorrow or the day after tomorrow on a 10+ day trip where I will use the two cameras exclusively. I will be reviewing the cameras after I get back!

Fascinating first look. Side by side, one has style and finish, the other could be an entry level toy that you would let a child play with. Then again, so few digital cameras have an expected life long enough to deserve the finish of the Hasselblad. When you consider the finish on a typical phone you would think that superb jewellery like finish would be more common. How few cameras lift the heart as desirable objects anymore? Those which do are probably aimed at a richer clientele who do not want to be seen with a black plastic melted in the sun look covered with text and randomly placed buttons and will never go looking deep into the menus.

There was a real feel of photographer driven design in the age of film which seems lost in the digital age, hence an instant list on a brief review as to why the machine is stuck together the way it is. It is especially surprising with the fuji since some of their more recent cameras they claimed to have been designed by enthusiasts who understood that controls needed a special look and feel right down to obsessing about the feel of the click between stops.

Caroline, that’s a great way to express the state of the industry today. I wish Fuji learned from companies like Hasselblad that the looks do matter. The Fuji GFX 50S is a very functional machine, but boy, it is far from being the prettiest camera I have handled. If you are after a great looking and functional camera at the same time, neither deliver. If Hasselblad put some more thought into the ergonomics and took care of the blackout issues, it would be an amazing achievement and would definitely be my top choice. Perhaps the second generation mirrorless medium format will be better, but for now, my choice is with the Fuji, despite its looks.

Nasim, I handled the Hasselblad several times and concur: it is too slow. That put me off of it. I don’t care about focus speed, but EVF refresh and startup, not to mention EVF switching, are painful. But the interface I got from the first try. It is the easiest to use medium format camera I’ve ever picked up. The touch is implemented perfectly and all camera functions are immediately available through a simple swipe. I can change all commonly used settings faster on it than on the Fuji.

Which is a shame: it is – at least for me – perfectly set up, but it reacts too slowly in some circumstances.

Its grip and hand-holdability are the best I’ve experienced in any camera, ever. Hasselblad nailed it. But their misses are big.

Ohm, if Hasselblad took care of the lag issues and made the camera a bit more functional, I would be all over it. But sadly, it seems like it will only appeal to a very small niche of photographers at the moment. Let’s hope that Hasselblad takes care of the major issues soon – I would love to see the company thrive with the X1D-50c. We need competition and more options in this space.

Dear Nasim, great article, thank you. I’m afraid neither my bank manager or my good lady would be pleased if I bought either camera ☹️ nor would my back thank me if I carried either with a bevy of lenses but as a keen amateur with 50 plus years shooting, I’m always interested in the latest and greatest. Once you get back from your trip, it would be interesting if you commented on the difference in image quality between these beasts and top end DSLRs from Nikon, Canon, Sony etc. I’m guessing it would be marginal but who knows? Regards, John.

John, for most people, the difference between full-frame and these MF cameras is too small to justify the high price tag. To see what you can expect from these sensors, please see my Pentax 645Z review.

Yes, much what I would have thought. Personally (now being in my 70s) I’ve settled on APS-C as the sweet spot between quality and weight and have just, in fact, swopped my Nikon D7100 for a Fuji XT-20. I’ve only committed to one lens for now (the 18-55) but fully expect to add more in due course. Your review of the XT-2 helped my decision as I expect IQ to be similar (if not exactly the same). I can see the 10-24 and a few primes in my future. If I really get on with the system another body could also appear. I did try the XE-1 a few years ago but had some issues with it (mainly focusing related) but Fuji seems to have worked hard to overcome these in the latest iterations of their bodies. Anyway, thanks for all the reviews, truly excellent examples, and great advice. Best wishes, John.

I agree about APS-C, but won’t be giving up my D7100 any time soon. I have the Nikkor 10-24, 16-85, 70-200/f4 and 300/f4D (with 1.4TC), plus a Sigma 105mm macro. 3 of those lenses were bought 2nd hand too, and they are good lenses. With (selling) 2nd hand prices being nothing special, I can’t see any reason to change. The other point is the laptop requirement. Add more pixels and you need a faster laptop and more memory. That’s as much part of the upgrade budget as the camera and lenses. If you’re a pro (by which I mean anyone who sells images) then go for it. But as an amateur who at most prints to A3, it’s a no-brainer. And what’s the most cost-effective part of my kit? Probably my Canon Pro-100. Failing that it’s the D7100 itself. Funny old world! I do like this website because the balance of info is about taking pictures. I do value the kit reviews, but really it’s all about how to get a pleasing image. And few of us on here will have anything less than good kit.

‘Morning Nasim, Thanks for the early-bird comparison; the Hasselblad does indeed have a beautiful minimalist look and associated feel. Perhaps a bit of Steve Jobs DNA in this cross over? In regards to color image comparison, your star-fighter’s jump suit is definitely warmer and the same color shift is clearly evident in your lovely model’s shoe’s and skin tone. Not a major issue as this is a personal call and can be easily adjusted in post processing. In regards to all around usability, the Fuji DSLR-like interface appears to be very clearly by design: I suspect they wanted the initial transition from DSLR FF to be familiar. For me, that’s one (or more) less hurtles. Less menu drilling after set-up, the better. But one big factor that both camps suffer from: the lack of image stabilization in either the lens or the body. On a trip-pod, it’s not an issue. But with a such a beautiful large sensor, what good is it if the pixels are sacrificed due to hand-held camera shake? Granted, boosting the iso and speed ameliorates it somewhat, but shooting in native low iso and low light makes for very dramatic images. And optical stabilization is so forgiving! Perhaps in your follow-up review, I would be very interested in hand-held usability image comparison’s between FF and MF. With all those many beautiful pixels, does real world use result in higher resolution but less keepers?

Sandy, the colors will always vary between cameras and that’s very normal, since a different AD and pipeline are used. The images were not post-processed – these are straight crops from TIFF images converted by RAWDigger.

As for image stabilization, I don’t see how it would be possible to implement on such huge sensors. Pentax was the first company to make a full-frame sensor image stabilized and it was a huge challenge that neither Nikon nor Canon want to undertake. A medium format sensor is a whole different ballgame!

As for hand-holding, shooting with medium format is really not much different than shooting with a full-frame camera. The images with the model were shot hand-held and all images came out tack sharp, even when I shot in low-light conditions. 50 megapixels is actually not a lot for a medium format camera – some APS-C sensors pack a lot more pixels per inch in comparison.

This article was an emotional rollercoaster! Luckily I can’t afford either camera.

It seems to me that the ergonomic and blackout issues on the Hasselblad could potentially be solved by firmware, but I doubt that the what-you-see-is-what-you-get leaf shutter issue could be. That issue by itself is disqualifying on a $9,000 camera.

I do wish the Fuji had a sleeker overall design though. What is the purpose of even having a removable viewfinder? Any where does the screen have to stick out so far?

Andrew, I think the idea behind the removable screen is to be able to replace it or upgrade if necessary. Also, Fuji is providing a different EVF adapter that can be used at different angles, which is pretty cool. However, the downsides are obviously the additional size and the weight. Not sure why Fuji made the GFX 50S back so big – might have to do with overheating of the sensor. The Hasselblad turns off live view after 15 seconds automatically and there is no setting to disable this behavior – I am guessing they did it due to heating concerns.

Profoto is working on the FUJI TTL Receiver for the B1 & B2 and all other Air TTL system, than you will have Hypersync and TTL with your FUJFILM GFX. That´s pure future !!!! Also you can use Hasselblad H Lenses with central shutter on the Fuji. Think it´ts the better choise

Axel, that’s true in regards to Hasselblad H lenses, so the potential is great for the Fuji GFX 50S. And I cannot wait for Profoto to make their excellent B1 and B2 flashes compatible with the Fuji X system!

Just looked at the images of the Star Wars figures. Images 3 and 4 look “grainy” (not sure of the spelling here) while images 5 and 6 appear to be better. Are you sure the pushed images are not 3 and 4 instead of 5 and 6?

It is a big misconception that pushing the image and choose a native ISO setting will give the same results. Pushing the file with digital gain sets the response to be linear with the gain and also the noise. This is not true for analog gain and oversampling. So pushing the 100 five steps is NOT equal to a 3200 file.

Thank you for taking your time with this article. Is there somewhere I can get the raw images of your model on the couch? I really don’t get much by looking at JPGs at such a low resolution even though they are nice images.

In my opinion, based on the three or four reviews I have read, the GFX is the best low cost medium format option available today for landscape and studio photography. But I question whether the marginal improvement in resolution and/or image quality over the Sony A7R2 or Canon 5DSR is worth the cost. And that marginal improvement is likely to become disappear later this year when Sony releases a follow-on to the A7R2. In my opinion, the cost risk and image quality risk of buying a GFX or Hasselblad before Sony releases new cameras later this year is high.

Good call, and in addition you are not going to see any difference at lower than A3 size. Hopefully, the next stage of Nasim’s review will compare A2/1 size prints from these medium format models and the D810 etc.

Jack, unless sensors are vastly different in age and the underlying technology, a larger sensor will always be better in IQ than smaller sensors. So if Sony manages to pull out a better full-frame sensor, the same technology will most likely arrive to medium format fairly soon. But to be honest, I don’t really see that happening – unless we see something completely new, or something similar to the Foveon technology, we have pretty much hit the wall of current sensors. For the next few years, I don’t expect image quality to get drastically better in newer cameras, so it will be more about features, lenses, support and accessories.

But the main question you are trying to get to I think is, “is medium format worth the investment when compared to full-frame”. And the answer to that is, for most people, it makes no sense whatsoever! In fact, if I show you an image from my Nikon D810 and show you a comparable image from the “crop” medium format cameras shown in this review, you will be disappointed to see such small differences between the two. The GFX 50S and X1D-50c are very specialized tools for those who want to step up from full-frame into medium format. I don’t foresee mass adoption of medium format cameras in the near future for this reason.

Oh no, Im so tired of this. Im pretty sure for the next 10 years we’re talking and reading about full frame vs medium format. Be prepared for just another megapixel war. :-)

Better stop talking. Go out and take pictures, with whatever format you like. with whatever camera you prefere. Photography was once about pressing the shutter and seeing and learning about light. But today it’s like a car-show. Better, faster, sexier.

“Better stop talking. Go out and take pictures, with whatever format you like. with whatever camera you prefere. Photography was once about pressing the shutter and seeing and learning about light. But today it’s like a car-show. Better, faster, sexier.”

First let me say that I am partially color blind. Keeping that in mind, to me, when looking at the images of the Star Wars figures, the Fuji pics seem to have a bluish cast (look at the squares behind the figures) when compared to the Hasselblad pics. Again, that just might be my eyesight. Does anybody else see this possible color difference?

William, I immediately spotted the colour difference that you mentioned.

I’ve attempted to approximate the difference between the first pair of images (captured at ISO 6400). The top row of colour squares has yellow in the left-hand column [Column 1]; below, I firstly compare the square to its right [Column 2], then compare the square in Column 3. I used ColorHexa to perform the conversions of my estimated RGB values:www.colorhexa.com/

Doug, no post-processing has been applied – these are straight from TIFF files converted by RAWDigger. Adobe sucks for accurate RAW conversions, which is why I used RAWDigger for accurate representation of sensor performance.

Thanks for the comparison. But are you sure that you couldn’t change focus point by touch on the X1D? Kevin Raber at Luminous Landscape did a review on the X1D, and claimed he could move focus point by touch. Either way, it does seem that it will take a bit of time to build the skill set to move the focus point by the dials, and the alternative is to bring the camera away from your face to change points. Hopefully future firmware updates will speed that up a bit.

Joe, yes you can, but you first have to press and hold the AF/MF button on top of the camera. Why not just allow touching any area of the touchscreen to put the focus point there, or even better, allow one to tap any area and trigger the camera to focus there. Such features can be found on a number of modern cameras today, including the GFX 50S.

I’m surprised by your focus point selection problem on the X1D. After holding down the AF/MF button I’m able to select the focus point via the rear touch screen just fine. You can also adjusted via the front and rear control wheels if you prefer.

Evan, that’s exactly the problem – you first have to hold down the AF/MF button before you are able to move the focus point. Why not allow one to simply tap any area in live view to put the focus point there? And why isn’t there an option to allow tapping on the touchscreen to focus? I am sure these things are possible to fix via firmware, but if Hasselblad is providing a touchscreen (which works really well by the way), it should have thought of ways to take advantage of it. I am hopeful that there will be more options to customize the behavior of the touchscreen, especially in regards to focusing.

In the example you provided for the bokeh the X1D image looks so much better, look at the eyes and lips for color differences but the biggest thing is the detail on the sofa in front of her legs. The material and wood trim show so much more detail, this looks to be over looked in your review.

I agree with your observations, however, Nasim was comparing the unpleasant wide-open-aperture bokeh of the X1D-50c + 90mm f/3.2 to the pleasant wide-open-aperture bokeh from the Fuji XT-2 + XF 56mm f/1.2 R; not to the Fuji GFX 50S medium format camera + a lens.

In-between the two images, Nasim wrote: “As you can see, the out of focus highlights definitely do not show roundness to them at the widest aperture of f/3.2. Even shooting with the Fuji XT-2 and the XF 56mm f/1.2 lens, I was able to get bokeh shapes looking nice and round:”

Absolutely no criticism intended — I made the same mistake on my first reading of the article because I am not familiar with Fujifilm’s naming conventions.

I am puzzled as to why Hasselblad thought it would be acceptable to use a straight-blade, rather than a rounded-blade, leaf shutter in the lens. Nasim’s results clearly show that the lens is incapable of rendering pleasant bokeh. I am curious as to why this problem is so blatantly obvious when using its leaf shutter at less than one tenth of its highest shutter speed.

Matthew, you are absolutely correct, but that’s not what I was doing in the review – I only posted a comparison between the Hassy and the X-T2 image to show the bokeh difference – the detail is obviously going to shine on medium format.

Nasim, Thank you for the preliminary review. I agree that objectively, the differences between photos taken with a Nikon D810 and medium format are small. I have a Mamiya DM56 (56 megapixels). I have compared photos using that camera with the 80mm leaf-shutter, 120mm macro and 150mm Mamiya/Phaseone lenses to my D800/D810 with the Zeiss Otus 55mm, Nikon 85mm F1.4G and 105mm F2.8 macro lenses. The Mamiya photos are very slightly better, but it requires that I use the Mamiya on a tripod and wait to trip the shutter after mirror up. The look of the Mamiya photos is very compelling and large prints (24 inches x 36 inches) are impressive. But if the D800/D810 was available when I bought the DM56 in mid-2011, I would not have bought it. The camera and lenses are very heavy and extremely expensive. The back takes 17 seconds to boot. I am curious that you are getting the increased depth of field with the leaf shutter lenses. I shot some photos with the DM56 with leaf shutter lens and do not get the increase in depth of field.

I have owned the X1D and the two initial lenses the 90 and 40mm for several weeks now. After spending 15K on this system, here is the real world surprise.

Both lenses heavily vignette with 90 degree side, and back lighting. You MUST, MUST, MUST use their Phocus software to apply then lens correction, and then you can bring into whatever editing program you prefer.

After spending this kind of money, I would have though that I would have a high quality raw image right out of the camera. It’s all voodoo, that is performed in software.

If you are shooting high end Dlsr 35mm ff, 36meg with Zeiss lenses, the slight difference in image size and quality, of the medium format, doesn’t justify the added expense of this camera.

However, I must say that the color rendition is exact, right out of the camera. The tonality is right on the money, and definitely what you are paying for. With flash sync at all speeds. This is an advertising, fashion, on location camera. Being able to reproduce color, and fabric textures with ease, and beautiful skin tones.

For those that ask about dynamic range, the big difference here is, I can shoot white. It is completely superior in retaining subtle detail in the highlights.

Thank you Nasim for a very nice review. There is a major discrepancy between the two though, and that is the Fuji is 14bit while the Hasselblad is 16bit. If the X1D was reduced to 14bit , the cost of the unit will drop considerably as well. You are paying for best files, as apposed to better.

As for Leaf Shutters, in addition to Sync speed, they are quiter, and have nearly zero vibrations.

I was told Blad as a company have been sold to a.n.other, so what happens next is anyone’s guess.

The weight of the camera’s seemed exactly the same, none of us could decide which was the heaviest body with standard lens in the end! The ‘Blad’s camera strap lug was oddly intrusive in my hand.

The number of focus points is largely irrelevant as is the face detection gimmick, as you say, the camera system has been the mainstay of thousands of working professionals over the years so not having such a feature is not relevant.

The Fuji menus did seem better. The sales assistant was more in favour of the Fuli than the ‘Blad and commented they had had ‘Blad ordered commuted over to the Fuli.

The articulated screen and the viewfinder on the Fuli are superior to the ‘Blad.

I had settled on the ‘Blad before now, but now, the Fuji is winning me over more and more, I am used to dealing with quirky cameras, Leica M240 and Sony a7r plus the D800 being my present bodies I dismiss what is irrelevant and focus on only that which the camera is needed for (5000 focus points and face detection being items I do not value), this review and others are putting my mind in a quandary!

The ability to fire off camera (‘Bad) flash beyond 1/250th is a real bonus though.

Lag is an issue I find annoying with the Leica too, so this may also sway me.

The bottom line is that ideally I need to borrow both cameras and explore their relative merits in the real world. Happy days!

Hasselblad offers an adapter for H lenses, a good idea, in my opinion. I was wondering if you know If the difference in price between H an X lenses is: – due to increased sharpness, lower CA and/or better bokeh on H; – due to manufacturing price; is it just cheaper to produce lenses for X system? Have you had the chance to test X1D with H lenses and compare it to Fuji and/or X lenses?

I think minimalistic design is definitely functional. It reads as if you set up the Fujifilm as the practical or functionally designed camera and the Hasselblad for feel. In my opinion good minimal designs are easier to use and therefore more functional. Between these two there is no comparison whatsoever. The Hasselblad is easy and straightforward to use and the Fujifilm has horrible overload of buttons.

The only thing that would concern me is the slow start up of the X1D. This needs to be addressed.

Fit and finish there is no comparison. The Hasselblad is beautiful, just like the old 500 series or a Rolleiflex, and that matters. The Fujifilm is hideous. For me it’s a very easy choice between these two – the X1D.

Coming from a MF/LF background of Pentax 67, RZ67, and Sinar, I’m interested in MF digital. Up until now, the price points have been way beyond reach.

My biggest concern is investing in a rig, only to find it discarded a few years later into the Obsolete bin. Having the Fuji and a few lenses, only to be told “Oh, we don’t support that anymore” is not acceptable.

A prime motivator for my recent purchase of a D810, was the continued support for my AI-S lenses. Nikon has abandoned this with the new D7500, and lost at least one sale from me.

” peaking of the menu, I personally found it to be overly simplified, with some menus having no more than two options. This could be good for someone who is starting out in photography, but come on – this is a medium format camera! ” ????! with all respect, could you list other medium format that you have worked with? Have you worked with RZs or Contax or Rollies…? Could you just name one? you might say they are not pro cameras, right ?!!! and Please, list only one (1) Pro medium format photographer not to hate having too much options on the menu!…. your pick,…

Nasim, I tried the free image editing software Phocus 3.3 from Hasselblad today. But output images (exported) from it are terribly underexposed. I am referring to Jpeg images of Canon and Pentax. I am not able to figure out why? This happens even if I don’t move any sliders. The viewer of Phocus shows the image normally.

Thank you for this explanation and comparison between the two cameras. It only makes my decision stronger for the Fuji. Hasselblad does not make his name here. I now use a full frame nikon. Do a lot of studio work and a medium format camera for beautiful portraits is high on my wish list.

Comment Policy: Although our team at Photography Life encourages all readers to actively participate in discussions, we reserve the right to delete / modify any content that does not comply with our Code of Conduct, or do not meet the high editorial standards of the published material.